慷慨、公平、信任与时间:治疗社区居民在经济学实验中的表现

IF 0.1 Q4 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Anup Gampa, Jessica Linley, B. Roe, K. Warren
{"title":"慷慨、公平、信任与时间:治疗社区居民在经济学实验中的表现","authors":"Anup Gampa, Jessica Linley, B. Roe, K. Warren","doi":"10.1108/TC-06-2017-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nTherapeutic communities (TCs) assume that residents are capable of working together to overcome substance abuse and criminal behavior. Economic games allow us to study the potential of cooperative behavior in TC residents. The paper aims to discuss this issue.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe authors analyze results from a sample of 85 corrections-based TC residents and a comparison group of 45 individuals drawn from the general population who participated in five well-known economic experiments – the dictator game, the ultimatum game, the trust game, risk attitude elicitation and time preference elicitation.\n\n\nFindings\nTC residents keep less money in the dictator game and return more in the trust game, and prefer short-term rewards in the time preference elicitation. In the ultimatum game, nearly half of all residents refuse offers that are either too low or too high.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nWhile the study involves a sample from one TC and a comparison group, the results suggest that residents are at least comparable to the general public in generosity and appear willing on average to repay trust. A substantial minority may have difficulty accepting help.\n\n\nPractical implications\nRapid peer feedback is of value. Residents will be willing to offer help to peers. The TC environment may explain residents’ tendency to return money in the trust game. Residents who refuse to accept offers that are either too low or too high in the ultimatum game may also have difficulty in accepting help from peers.\n\n\nSocial implications\nEconomic games may help to clarify guidelines for TC clinical practice.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThis is the first use of economic games with TC residents.\n","PeriodicalId":43236,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Communities","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Generosity, fairness, trust and time: the performance of therapeutic community residents in economics experiments\",\"authors\":\"Anup Gampa, Jessica Linley, B. Roe, K. Warren\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/TC-06-2017-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nTherapeutic communities (TCs) assume that residents are capable of working together to overcome substance abuse and criminal behavior. Economic games allow us to study the potential of cooperative behavior in TC residents. The paper aims to discuss this issue.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe authors analyze results from a sample of 85 corrections-based TC residents and a comparison group of 45 individuals drawn from the general population who participated in five well-known economic experiments – the dictator game, the ultimatum game, the trust game, risk attitude elicitation and time preference elicitation.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nTC residents keep less money in the dictator game and return more in the trust game, and prefer short-term rewards in the time preference elicitation. In the ultimatum game, nearly half of all residents refuse offers that are either too low or too high.\\n\\n\\nResearch limitations/implications\\nWhile the study involves a sample from one TC and a comparison group, the results suggest that residents are at least comparable to the general public in generosity and appear willing on average to repay trust. A substantial minority may have difficulty accepting help.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nRapid peer feedback is of value. Residents will be willing to offer help to peers. The TC environment may explain residents’ tendency to return money in the trust game. Residents who refuse to accept offers that are either too low or too high in the ultimatum game may also have difficulty in accepting help from peers.\\n\\n\\nSocial implications\\nEconomic games may help to clarify guidelines for TC clinical practice.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThis is the first use of economic games with TC residents.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":43236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic Communities\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic Communities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/TC-06-2017-0017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Communities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/TC-06-2017-0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

目的治疗社区(tc)假设居民能够共同努力克服药物滥用和犯罪行为。经济博弈使我们能够研究TC居民合作行为的潜力。本文旨在对这一问题进行探讨。设计/方法/方法作者分析了85个基于纠正的TC居民样本和45个来自一般人群的比较组的结果,这些人参加了五个著名的经济实验-独裁者游戏,最后通牒游戏,信任游戏,风险态度引出和时间偏好引出。结果表明:在独裁者博弈中,居民保留的钱较少,而在信任博弈中,居民的回报更多;在时间偏好激发中,居民更倾向于短期奖励。在最后通牒博弈中,近一半的居民拒绝过低或过高的报价。研究局限/启示虽然研究涉及一个TC和一个比较组的样本,但结果表明,居民在慷慨方面至少与一般公众相当,并且平均而言愿意回报信任。相当一部分人可能难以接受帮助。实际意义快速的同行反馈是有价值的。居民将愿意为同龄人提供帮助。TC环境可以解释居民在信任博弈中倾向于归还资金。在最后通牒游戏中,拒绝接受过高或过低报价的居民也可能难以接受同伴的帮助。社会意义经济游戏可能有助于阐明TC临床实践的指导方针。独创性/价值这是第一次使用经济游戏与TC居民。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Generosity, fairness, trust and time: the performance of therapeutic community residents in economics experiments
Purpose Therapeutic communities (TCs) assume that residents are capable of working together to overcome substance abuse and criminal behavior. Economic games allow us to study the potential of cooperative behavior in TC residents. The paper aims to discuss this issue. Design/methodology/approach The authors analyze results from a sample of 85 corrections-based TC residents and a comparison group of 45 individuals drawn from the general population who participated in five well-known economic experiments – the dictator game, the ultimatum game, the trust game, risk attitude elicitation and time preference elicitation. Findings TC residents keep less money in the dictator game and return more in the trust game, and prefer short-term rewards in the time preference elicitation. In the ultimatum game, nearly half of all residents refuse offers that are either too low or too high. Research limitations/implications While the study involves a sample from one TC and a comparison group, the results suggest that residents are at least comparable to the general public in generosity and appear willing on average to repay trust. A substantial minority may have difficulty accepting help. Practical implications Rapid peer feedback is of value. Residents will be willing to offer help to peers. The TC environment may explain residents’ tendency to return money in the trust game. Residents who refuse to accept offers that are either too low or too high in the ultimatum game may also have difficulty in accepting help from peers. Social implications Economic games may help to clarify guidelines for TC clinical practice. Originality/value This is the first use of economic games with TC residents.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Therapeutic Communities
Therapeutic Communities SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
50.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The Journal publishes academic papers, case studies, empirical research and opinion. The Journal is interested in publishing papers that critically creatively engage with ideas drawn from a range of discourses: the therapeutic community movement and other related professional practice, psychoanalysis, art, literature, poetry, music, architecture, culture, education, philosophy, religion and environmental studies. It will be of value to those who work in health services, social services, voluntary and charitable organizations and for all professionals involved with staff teams in therapeutic and supportive organizations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信